CoderKat

I am wet, so it must be raining.

I agree. It pains me that I have to ask them. The ones my company does are very restrictive and high pressure. I personally try to choose reasonable problems with realistic scenarios (especially when interviewing entry level folks). I also have lots of follow up questions that I like to think are well grounded on realism.

I personally give a complete pass for stuff like standard library functions and will outright tell the candidate about an available function if they're unsure what it's called or how its used. I'm testing problem solving and an understanding of language , fundamentals not their ability to memorize a standard library. I mean, heck, I can't begin to count how many times I've had to google "[language] sort list".

Honestly, it sucks to have to watch a candidate struggle. It's awkward and not fun. I want to see the candidate do well. And heck, if they can't do well, I want them to at least be able to make progress, because I know it would feel bad to feel like you bombed the interview. Sadly, the environment of tech interviews isn't conductive to that. They're stressful and sometimes perfectly qualified candidates do poorly simply because of nerves.

I feel like for software, the big barrier is getting past HR/recruiters. Once you get to talk to someone technical, it's a lot easier. But hell if I know how the heck the non technical staff decides how to progress people.

I've done tech interviews. They're leetcode, which isn't great, but at least it's fair. There's no magic words there. I just want to know if you can reasonably approach a problem (and I don't pick anything I couldn't get hired on), can show problem solving skills, and show an understanding of algorithms and data structures. You don't even need to solve the problem if you can come close and your thinking out loud shows good skills. And most definitely don't need to be an optimal solution (though it helps).

But getting to the tech screen, I don't even know. I've made internal referrals that never even get assigned to anyone, despite a glowing referral. Maybe it's just super competitive. Maybe there's a scarcity of low level positions (though I know many teams that are top heavy and only need low level positions). I really know nothing about what it takes to get to the tech screen level. But once you're there, I really do think it's a lot more reasonable (not at all perfect, but better).

Or at the very least, lower level employees often don't get to give big ideas. A big way to get your ideas listened to is to get promoted in the first place. Small ideas only do so much. Sometimes there's big, systemic problems that need big ideas to fix.

Not just a path to advance, but a path that feels fair and is faster than changing jobs. A lot of places that do pay well still make it easier to go up a level as an external hire than they do for an internal promotion. In other words, it's easier to get "promoted" by switching jobs.

Which is pretty weird. Companies would rather make the decision based off a few hours of interviews for someone who knows nothing about their company, over years of data for someone who knows the company well. I think it's partly "grass is always greener" and also partly companies wanting to pay people less when they already employ them. They'll pay more for external hires cause they want to get em, but once they're there, there's less reason to pay more.

And in general, I think younger people are more willing to take risks. Changing jobs can be annoying. You have to start from scratch with learning everything, getting to know your coworkers, potentially moving, etc. But on the other hand, a new job can typically give a pay increase (which young people especially need). In many jobs, the only way to get a decent pay increase is to jump ship.

Happened to me, too. Some unknown people caused damage to a common room and they billed everyone in the building. I tried to email about it, but they didn't budge. I felt I had to pay it because the university threatens to withhold transcripts and stuff if you have outstanding fines.

Yeah, I think LLMs and AI art have overdominated the discourse to the degree that some people think they're the only form of AI that exists, ignoring things like text translation, the autocompletion of your phone keyboard, Photoshop intelligent eraser, etc.

Some forms of AI are debatable of their value (especially in their current form). But there's other types of AI that most people consider highly useful and I think we just forget about it because the controversial types are more memorable.

Ahaha I don't even know what that word was supposed to be and how it ended up as "white". I meant to say "the OP".

I'm not sure about anyone who was hired before WFH, but generally, a substantial change to job duties or location is considered constructive dismissal. ie, it's legally the same as being fired without cause. That might be eligible for severance and definitely for unemployment.

I think the white is referring to minorities being scapegoated, though. While absolutely some people vote against their best interests, they often don't have the numbers to make change themselves (eg, trans and NB people are maybe 1% of the population but getting severely attacked right now) or the system is constantly trying to screw them over (eg, black people are a sizable chunk of the population, but there's countless efforts to restrict their ability to vote and keep them poor).

Yeah, now would you know when you cross the border if there wasn't that orange-sepia tint?